286 réponses à ce sujet

[Johcande XX]

KingZayd wrote...

PlumPaul82393 wrote...

Johcande XX wrote...

I don't understand for the life of me why there is such divisiveness between IT subscribers and skeptics..

1.The arrogance the IT believers have.

2.The "IT is the only way the endings can be salvaged" BS to further their agenda.

3.The IT spamming is annoying.

Those are some of the reasons there is such divisiveness IMO.

1. The arrogance the anti ITers have.

2. The "Bioware would never do IT" BS to further their agenda.

3. The Anti-IT spamming is annoying,

These reasons are just as valid.

And for the record, I believe either set of reasons is just as true as the other. That is, not completely.
1 for example, is too general for both groups. but is applicable to some in both groups.

I would also say it's a lot of guilt by association.  Not everybody of either side fall into those points, but some do and those are the people that utterly confuse me.

[dreman9999]

JediMasterSal_0 wrote...

Heh, Shepard was indoctrinated back in the original ME, when he got the visions from the "Prothean" beacon.

(Waits for flaming to occur...)

ME:ascension says no.

[Seboist]

Darth_Trethon wrote...

Seboist wrote...

Darth_Trethon wrote...

One thing.....the final hours app clearly shows BioWare DID plan to have the player lose control of Shepard who would fall under reaper control for a portion at the end of the game.....though they claim this was cut because it proved too difficult to develop. Yet it serves to show you are just plain wrong.....you can hate other portions of the game all you like it still doesn't change annything.....they DID intend for indoctrination to happen.

Give it up fanboy, this series is an utter joke when it comes to writing and game design. If this moronic "IT theory" was correct then it would have actually have been in the game as they would have made use of Shepard being zapped by Object Rho and/or revealed Lazarus tech was Reaper derived but that would mean these games would have an actual continuity and lord knows Bioware doesn't like that.

These colored endings are the logical conclusion to a horrible crucible plot that was bad from the get-go! Deal with it and move on.

Insults and hate.....from someone accusing BioWare of handling the opening level in a "juvenile" way....I am very impressed. <_<

If you hate the whole game or the series and not just the end why are you here? That makes less sense than the ME3 ending.

Having a defence committee act like total blubbering morons for no other reason than to provide the players with a metaphorical rimjob is the definition of juvenile.

Why am I here? It's a discussion board and I'm discussing. Duh!

And I might as well add some more salt to the wound by saying Call of Duty: Black Ops actually had an "indoctrination" plot and pulled it off by having subtle clues that were actually IN THE GAME and not from the self-delusion of it's fanboys.

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

KingZayd wrote...
In ME2, you could fail catastrophically by having everyone die. You could also kill yourself by having relations with Morinth.

Sex with Morinth is not an endgame choice and is by all intents and purposes a small easter egg. And I already commented on the bad endings in ME2.

A lot of people suspected that your choice with the collector base and the council would have some important impact at some point. It's not a good thing that they didn't.

By having no consequences (intended consequences or not) , your decisions are meaningless.

So instead of having 3 choices that lead to the cycle being broken in 3 very different ways Bioware should i cut it down to one failure path and one succes path?

dreman9999 wrote...

Lizardviking wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

IsaacShep wrote...

Perhaps.
But if it's true, it means the trilogy had 1 single ending and only 1
actual choice.

Why do people keep saying this? Use some
imationation....It does mean there is just one choice.....It means a
diffent end....2 endings. One as a Shepard that keep him mind and the
other as a reaper agent....The reaper agent one would end like this...http://www.youtube.c...pQDE0BcM#t=124s, but the player perseption would be what Saren's IS.

No. There is only one right succesful choice. Something that runs counter to the endings of the last two games.

Imagine if saving the Collector base resulted in Shepard falling to his death.

You
not getting it. That would mean that the other choice kill Shepard.
Based on IT it's all an illusion. Shepard is not really dieing...He only
is if you take the ending as totaly real. The arguement is based on the
premise that IT is real. That would make 3 choices to 2 and the fct
that Shepard is not dead. It's not one right ending, just one ending
that keep Shep alive at the end.

Alright. Change "Falling to his death" to "Gets indoctrinated" my point still stands.

Modifié par Lizardviking, 09 mai 2012 - 09:40 .

[KingZayd]

PlumPaul82393 wrote...

KingZayd wrote...1. The arrogance the anti ITers have.

2. The "Bioware would never do IT" BS to further their agenda.

3. The Anti-IT spamming is annoying,

These reasons are just as valid.

And for the record, I believe either set of reasons is just as true.
1 for example, is too general for both groups. but is applicable to some in both groups.

I can agree with 1, but for 2 I'd say it's more "Bioware isn't stupid enough to have an incomplete ending to a last game of an epic trilogy", and I don't believe 3 is correct. You (or at least I don't) see multiple threads made every day about how bad the IT is, while threads about how cools it is are made by the hour.

really? have you been paying attention lately? I've seen like 4 or 5 threads in the last 24 hours, 3 of which deal with how Bioware wouldn't make 1 choice better than the others etc.

Modifié par KingZayd, 09 mai 2012 - 09:40 .

[Darth_Trethon]

Seboist wrote...

Having a defence committee act like total blubbering morons for no other reason than to provide the players with a metaphorical rimjob is the definition of juvenile.

Why am I here? It's a discussion board and I'm discussing. Duh!

And I might as well add some more salt to the wound by saying Call of Duty: Black Ops actually had an "indoctrination" plot and pulled it off by having subtle clues that were actually IN THE GAME and not from the self-delusion of it's fanboys.

Well you hate the whole series so clearly it must not be worth your time to play so if it's not worth playing why is it worth discussing? No, you are not here to discuiss anything, you are here to be as offensive and insulting as possible to everyone from the developers to the fans....desire likely derived out of some misguided need for attention which I am done giving you.

Modifié par Darth_Trethon, 09 mai 2012 - 09:44 .

[PlumPaul93]

KingZayd wrote... have you been paying attention lately? I've seen like 4 or 5 threads in the last 24 hours, 3 of which deal with how Bioware wouldn't make 1 choice better than the others etc.

I'll admit I haven't, though my opinion about it goes of the first month and a half or so after the release when it was spammed as truth relentlessly.

Modifié par PlumPaul82393, 09 mai 2012 - 09:47 .

[dreman9999]

Lizardviking wrote...

KingZayd wrote...
In ME2, you could fail catastrophically by having everyone die. You could also kill yourself by having relations with Morinth.

Sex with Morinth is not an endgame choice and is by all intents and purposes a small easter egg. And I already commented on the bad endings in ME2.

A lot of people suspected that your choice with the collector base and the council would have some important impact at some point. It's not a good thing that they didn't.

By having no consequences (intended consequences or not) , your decisions are meaningless.

So instead of having 3 choices that lead to the cycle being broken in 3 very different ways Bioware should i cut it down to one failure path and one succes path?

dreman9999 wrote...

Lizardviking wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

IsaacShep wrote...

Perhaps.
But if it's true, it means the trilogy had 1 single ending and only 1
actual choice.

Why do people keep saying this? Use some
imationation....It does mean there is just one choice.....It means a
diffent end....2 endings. One as a Shepard that keep him mind and the
other as a reaper agent....The reaper agent one would end like this...http://www.youtube.c...pQDE0BcM#t=124s, but the player perseption would be what Saren's IS.

No. There is only one right succesful choice. Something that runs counter to the endings of the last two games.

Imagine if saving the Collector base resulted in Shepard falling to his death.

You
not getting it. That would mean that the other choice kill Shepard.
Based on IT it's all an illusion. Shepard is not really dieing...He only
is if you take the ending as totaly real. The arguement is based on the
premise that IT is real. That would make 3 choices to 2 and the fct
that Shepard is not dead. It's not one right ending, just one ending
that keep Shep alive at the end.

Alright. Change "Falling to his death" to "Gets indoctrinated" my point still stands.

Getting indoctrinated doesn't may IT bad. It just changes the way the game ends. The whole idea is to trick the player. Ifyou take the game ending as is, Shepard get indoctrinated and Dies anyway in those 2 choices.

[dreman9999]

KingZayd wrote...

PlumPaul82393 wrote...

KingZayd wrote...1. The arrogance the anti ITers have.

2. The "Bioware would never do IT" BS to further their agenda.

3. The Anti-IT spamming is annoying,

These reasons are just as valid.

And for the record, I believe either set of reasons is just as true.
1 for example, is too general for both groups. but is applicable to some in both groups.

I can agree with 1, but for 2 I'd say it's more "Bioware isn't stupid enough to have an incomplete ending to a last game of an epic trilogy", and I don't believe 3 is correct. You (or at least I don't) see multiple threads made every day about how bad the IT is, while threads about how cools it is are made by the hour.

really? have you been paying attention lately? I've seen like 4 or 5 threads in the last 24 hours, 3 of which deal with how Bioware wouldn't make 1 choice better than the others etc.

Why would they make an ending that benifits the reapers a good end?

[KingZayd]

Lizardviking wrote...

KingZayd wrote...
In ME2, you could fail catastrophically by having everyone die. You could also kill yourself by having relations with Morinth.

Sex with Morinth is not an endgame choice and is by all intents and purposes a small easter egg. And I already commented on the bad endings in ME2.

A lot of people suspected that your choice with the collector base and the council would have some important impact at some point. It's not a good thing that they didn't.

By having no consequences (intended consequences or not) , your decisions are meaningless.

So instead of having 3 choices that lead to the cycle being broken in 3 very different ways Bioware should i cut it down to one failure path and one succes path?

dreman9999 wrote...

Lizardviking wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

IsaacShep wrote...

Perhaps.
But if it's true, it means the trilogy had 1 single ending and only 1
actual choice.

Why do people keep saying this? Use some
imationation....It does mean there is just one choice.....It means a
diffent end....2 endings. One as a Shepard that keep him mind and the
other as a reaper agent....The reaper agent one would end like this...http://www.youtube.c...pQDE0BcM#t=124s, but the player perseption would be what Saren's IS.

No. There is only one right succesful choice. Something that runs counter to the endings of the last two games.

Imagine if saving the Collector base resulted in Shepard falling to his death.

You
not getting it. That would mean that the other choice kill Shepard.
Based on IT it's all an illusion. Shepard is not really dieing...He only
is if you take the ending as totaly real. The arguement is based on the
premise that IT is real. That would make 3 choices to 2 and the fct
that Shepard is not dead. It's not one right ending, just one ending
that keep Shep alive at the end.

Alright. Change "Falling to his death" to "Gets indoctrinated" my point still stands.

actually IT predicted an ending DLC where the story would complete. Just because Shepard is compromised doesn't mean the war is lost. His companions are still alive, as are a bunch of other allies. Shepard being indoctrinated means he might hurt the war effort, maybe turning on his friends. Why couldn't someone like Garrus take him down? or Shepard paragon interrupt suicide? Why must Shepard direct everything personally?

The different choices could just lead to varying degrees of success against the the reapers. Maybe control and synthesis would result in different levels fo indoctrination. 

Why would Shepard be the only person capable activating the Crucible in your opinion?

[PlumPaul93]

dreman9999 wrote...]Why would they make an ending that benifits the reapers a good end?

I don't remember any of the endings benefiting the reapers.

[KingZayd]

PlumPaul82393 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...]Why would they make an ending that benifits the reapers a good end?

I don't remember any of the endings benefiting the reapers.

the ones where they don't die?

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

KingZayd wrote...
actually IT predicted an ending DLC where the story would complete. Just because Shepard is compromised doesn't mean the war is lost. His companions are still alive, as are a bunch of other allies. Shepard being indoctrinated means he might hurt the war effort, maybe turning on his friends. Why couldn't someone like Garrus take him down? or Shepard paragon interrupt suicide? Why must Shepard direct everything personally?

The different choices could just lead to varying degrees of success against the the reapers. Maybe control and synthesis would result in different levels fo indoctrination. 

Why would Shepard be the only person capable activating the Crucible in your opinion?

By "failure" I mean negative, which is exactly what IT is. Instead of providing us 3 end choices where none of them are "the right choice" and each contain their merit and reason to be picked. We will reduce it to a simply right or wrong.

[PlumPaul93]

KingZayd wrote...the ones where they don't die?

But are made peaceful and help rebuild the galaxy?

[KingZayd]

Lizardviking wrote...

KingZayd wrote...
actually IT predicted an ending DLC where the story would complete. Just because Shepard is compromised doesn't mean the war is lost. His companions are still alive, as are a bunch of other allies. Shepard being indoctrinated means he might hurt the war effort, maybe turning on his friends. Why couldn't someone like Garrus take him down? or Shepard paragon interrupt suicide? Why must Shepard direct everything personally?

The different choices could just lead to varying degrees of success against the the reapers. Maybe control and synthesis would result in different levels fo indoctrination. 

Why would Shepard be the only person capable activating the Crucible in your opinion?

By "failure" I mean negative, which is exactly what IT is. Instead of providing us 3 end choices where none of them are "the right choice" and each contain their merit and reason to be picked. We will reduce it to a simply right or wrong.

There are lots of choices in the mass effect series with "negative" results. Why not again?

[KingZayd]

PlumPaul82393 wrote...

KingZayd wrote...the ones where they don't die?

But are made peaceful and help rebuild the galaxy?

and how are they made peaceful?

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

KingZayd wrote...

Lizardviking wrote...

KingZayd wrote...
actually IT predicted an ending DLC where the story would complete. Just because Shepard is compromised doesn't mean the war is lost. His companions are still alive, as are a bunch of other allies. Shepard being indoctrinated means he might hurt the war effort, maybe turning on his friends. Why couldn't someone like Garrus take him down? or Shepard paragon interrupt suicide? Why must Shepard direct everything personally?

The different choices could just lead to varying degrees of success against the the reapers. Maybe control and synthesis would result in different levels fo indoctrination. 

Why would Shepard be the only person capable activating the Crucible in your opinion?

By "failure" I mean negative, which is exactly what IT is. Instead of providing us 3 end choices where none of them are "the right choice" and each contain their merit and reason to be picked. We will reduce it to a simply right or wrong.

There are lots of choices in the mass effect series with "negative" results. Why not again?

Because they were never the end choices?

[jijeebo]

KingZayd wrote...

PlumPaul82393 wrote...

KingZayd wrote...the ones where they don't die?

But are made peaceful and help rebuild the galaxy?

and how are they made peaceful?

They've stopped killing everyone?

[Zany Jedi]

Lizardviking wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

Lizardviking wrote...

KingZayd wrote...
actually IT predicted an ending DLC where the story would complete. Just because Shepard is compromised doesn't mean the war is lost. His companions are still alive, as are a bunch of other allies. Shepard being indoctrinated means he might hurt the war effort, maybe turning on his friends. Why couldn't someone like Garrus take him down? or Shepard paragon interrupt suicide? Why must Shepard direct everything personally?

The different choices could just lead to varying degrees of success against the the reapers. Maybe control and synthesis would result in different levels fo indoctrination. 

Why would Shepard be the only person capable activating the Crucible in your opinion?

By "failure" I mean negative, which is exactly what IT is. Instead of providing us 3 end choices where none of them are "the right choice" and each contain their merit and reason to be picked. We will reduce it to a simply right or wrong.

There are lots of choices in the mass effect series with "negative" results. Why not again?

Because they were never the end choices?

Why can't end choices yield negative results? Not all of them should be positive.

[Raiil]

If IT were to be true, then there has been a failure of epic proportions. Not because of IT itself, but because in order to 'spot' it, a player would need a computer with hi-def, either be wearing good headphones or have surround sound, and have a strong working knowledge of the extended universe. It would be a failure on the writers that I can't begin to express.

[dreman9999]

PlumPaul82393 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...]Why would they make an ending that benifits the reapers a good end?

I don't remember any of the endings benefiting the reapers.

"Hey Shepard, I know you don't want us to impost evolution, based on our warped beliefs, on all races by combining everyone with tech to solve all their problems for them but I , the star child ,have other thing you can do other destory us, the reapers, which would be a totaly big mistak for someone off reason. You can control us your self...Granted, enerything you are will die and you would be someone new with different wants after we up load you into  our system and you will want different things afterward, but you can control us all and hepl us come up with something better, which maybe the same thing any way....Or we can 
impost evolution life by combining everything with tech 
to solve all their problems for them.....No, it not the same aswhat we weredoing before, you can trust me. I'm totaly not lieing even though I'm from a race of MACHINES WITH A HISTORY OF DECEPTION...
Trust me....

[PlumPaul93]

KingZayd wrote...and how are they made peaceful?

They stopped reaping for one. Unless you know something I don't, I don't see how Control or Synthesis benefited the Reapers. I don't particularly like either one, but they do seem to be the good choices. I just don't see how them living benefits them.

[dreman9999]

PlumPaul82393 wrote...

KingZayd wrote...the ones where they don't die?

But are made peaceful and help rebuild the galaxy?

What indicates they are rebuilding the galexy?

[KingZayd]

Lizardviking wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

Lizardviking wrote...

KingZayd wrote...
actually IT predicted an ending DLC where the story would complete. Just because Shepard is compromised doesn't mean the war is lost. His companions are still alive, as are a bunch of other allies. Shepard being indoctrinated means he might hurt the war effort, maybe turning on his friends. Why couldn't someone like Garrus take him down? or Shepard paragon interrupt suicide? Why must Shepard direct everything personally?

The different choices could just lead to varying degrees of success against the the reapers. Maybe control and synthesis would result in different levels fo indoctrination. 

Why would Shepard be the only person capable activating the Crucible in your opinion?

By "failure" I mean negative, which is exactly what IT is. Instead of providing us 3 end choices where none of them are "the right choice" and each contain their merit and reason to be picked. We will reduce it to a simply right or wrong.

There are lots of choices in the mass effect series with "negative" results. Why not again?

Because they were never the end choices?

according to IT, this isn't the real end.

And also, why can't the end choices for the end of the trilogy follow different rules to the end choices for the earlier parts of a trilogy?

[dreman9999]

PlumPaul82393 wrote...

KingZayd wrote...and how are they made peaceful?

They stopped reaping for one. Unless you know something I don't, I don't see how Control or Synthesis benefited the Reapers. I don't particularly like either one, but they do seem to be the good choices. I just don't see how them living benefits them.

How do you know? What if they left to move the citadel away so that no one can stop their new plans? Also,how do you know if the end was real?